We would also appreciate your feedback on Chinese Buddhist Encyclopedia. Please write feedback hereHere you can read media articles about the Chinese Buddhist Encyclopedia which have been published all over the world.

However Buddhism is not atheistic in the sense that modern secularism, rationalism, humanism, etc. could be regarded to be atheistic (although it has much in common with them). Buddhism is not concerned primarily with refuting the notion of God (as some atheistic writers have done). It is principally concerned with developing a method of escape from the worldly ills. This involves undertaking a method of mentaldiscipline and a code of conduct which is sufficient to satisfy the most demanding of spiritual requirements. Indeed only very little of the Buddha's voluminous discourses deal directly with the question of God. He was more interested in expounding a way to personal salvation, and to improve the weal of mankind both in this world and in the worlds to come. It is this task that informs most of the discourses of the Buddha which later came to be compiled into the various Canons of Buddhism.

The Buddha did not take an ambiguous or agnostic position on the question of God as he is sometimes represented as having taken by theistically inclined writers. The Buddha has stated his position on God in clear and unequivocal terms.
3. The Notion of God

It is first of all necessary to establish what is meant by the term "God". This term is used to designate a Supreme Being endowed with the qualities of omnipotence and omniscience, who is the creator of the universe with all its contents, and the chief law-giver for humans. God is generally considered as being concerned with the welfare of his human creatures, and the ultimatesalvation of those who follow his dictates. God is therefore a person of some kind, and the question whether such an entityexists or not is fundamental to all theistic systems.

Just as Buddhism rejects the notion of a Supreme God it also rejects the notion of an abstract God-principle operating in the universe. The notion of Brahman (in the neuter) is not discussed at all in the Buddhist texts, and even in India it may well be a post-Buddhist development resulting from the attempt to reconcile the belief in God(s) with the powerful critique of the Buddha. It is therefore the attitude of Buddhism to the notion of a supreme personal God animating the Universe that we must consider.

"I am Brahma, the Great Brahma, the Supreme One, the Mighty, the All-seeing, the Ruler, the Lord of all, the Maker, the Creator, the Chief of all appointing to each his place, the Ancient of days, the Father of all that is and will be." (Digha Nikaya, II, 263).

In the West a number of "arguments" have been adduced to prove or disprove the existence of God. Some of these were anticipated by the Buddha. One of the most popular is the "first cause" argument according to which everything must have a cause, and God is considered the first cause of the Universe. The Buddhisttheory of causation says that every thing must have preconditions for its existence, and this law must also extend to "God" should such an entityexist. But while the "first cause" claims that God creates everything, it exempts God from the ambit of this law. However if exemptions are made with respect to God such exemptions could be made with respect to other things also hereby contradicting the principle of the first cause.

But the argument which the Buddha most frequently uses is what is now called the "argument from evil" which in the Buddhistsense could be stated as the argument from dukkha (suffering or unsatisfactoriness). This states that the empirical fact of the existence of dukkha cannot be reconciled with the existence of an omnipotent and omniscient being who is also all good. The following verses from the Bharidatta Jataka bring this out clearly:

If the creator of the world entire
They call God, of every being be the Lord
Why does he order such misfortune
And not create concord? sace hi so issaro sabbalokeBrahma bahabhatapati pajana.m
ki.m sabbaloke vidah alakkhi.m
ki.m sabbaloka.m na sukhi.m akasi
If the creator of the world entire
They call God, of every being be the Lord
Why prevail deceit, lies and ignorance
And he such inequity and injustice create? sace hi so issaro sabbalokeBrahma bahabhatapati pajana.m
m�y�mus�vajjamadena c'api
loka.m adhammena kimatthak�si
If the creator of the world entire
They call God, of every being be the Lord
Then an evilmaster is he, (O Aritta) Knowing what's right did let wrong prevail! sace hi so issaro sabbalokeBrahma bahabhatapati pajana.m
adhammiyo bhatapat Ari.t.tha
dhamme sat yo vidahi adhamma.m

From the Buddhist standpoint the classic theistic statement that "God created man in his (i.e God's) image" has actually to be reversed. It is man who has created God in his (i.e. man's) image! And as man's own image changes so does that of his God. Thus in the present time with the rise of feminism there is an attempt to change the gender of God from a man to a woman (or perhaps even to a neuter). To liberate himself mankind has to shed his delusions, and one of these is the existence of God.
5. The God-Concept and BuddhistPrinciples

There are many causes for the persistence of the God-idea. Some of these are induced by social and other factors. These include the institutionalisation of theisticreligion, the use of vast economic resources to propagate it including the mass media, and the legal right given to parents to impose their religions on their children. There is also the attractiveness of vicarious salvation, or salvation through prayer or forgiveness which permits the committing of many moral crimes for which the doer does not "pay". We shall not consider these here. From the Buddhist point of view the rootcauses are ignorance and fear, with fear itself ultimately the product of ignorance. Atheisticmaterialism has failed to dislodge the God-idea not because of any deficiency of its arguments when compared to those put forward by the theists, but because it too has not been able to eliminate ignorance.

The Buddha himself grasped the overpervading nature of ignorance because of his titanic struggle to liberate himself. He even initially displayed some reluctance to propagate his knowledge because of the formidable nature of the task. Nonetheless he proclaimed his knowledge out of compassion for the world because he felt that at least a few "with little dust in their eyes" would be able to benefit fully from his ideas. From the Buddhist point of view the persistence of theism, with all its evil consequences seen in history, is a necessary consequence of the persistence of ignorance.